What's Your All-Time Ebay Description?

[Archive]

Posted By: Rich Jacobs 

This has to be close to the best,for a T202:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1829209904

"This card of these legendary players is in EX condition; however, above O'Leary's hat is colored in with magic marker, and his nose is also colored."

[Archive]

Posted By: Brian H.

Every day I seem to see a new grading system on Ebay....
I do have a recurrent themes I thought I'd share:
1. Whenever the item title includes the word "old" it probably isn't. My personal favorite is "Old Reprint"
as if there is a market for vintage reprints rather than those darn "new reprints." After all in the old days they really knew how to reprint them!
2. I the seller says that the Cracker Jack is from 1914 it probably isn't (especially if its in nice shape and happens to be of any HOFer or Joe Jackson). As an added note the reprints of CJs out there are virtually always reprints of 1915s so that many sellers trying to pass off CJ reprints as real aren't even right about what they are lying(or uninformed about in the first place)
3. "T206 Wagner" should be read as REPRINT even if it is not stated as such (the same usually applies to "T206 Plank" and "Cracker Jack Shoeless Joe Jackson");
4. This is the sad one -- whenever the seller invokes God or America they are usually trying to screw the buyer in some way or another. (hope I didn't offend anyone there but thats what I have been seeing); and
5. Almost all cards inheritted/found or whatever from Grandpa are actually reprints that may be younger than Kobe Bryant.

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

I would be careful about your number "5". Although almost all "finds" from attics, shoeboxes, walls, etc...are bad some are not. I just picked up 34 cards I needed that were from an "old" collector. AlSO, my Boston Team Kalamazoo was on ebay and had a long story behind....someone found it in a wall of their grandma's house when tearing it down blah blah blah....and if you remember there were about 700 hits on ebay and nary (I am loving that word lately) a bid. I bought the card after the auction because it had 0 bids. The blurry scan on ebay was just that; a blurry scan. I bought the card for about 1/2 it's value, the all important photo is very sharp in person, and it came back an SGC 20 (because of some semi-minor back damage). Just a word of caution....although again, I do agree that "almost" all of the stories are just that......stories....best regards.....

[Archive]

Posted By: Julie Vognar

...

[Archive]

Posted By: Brian Hodes

"mentioned only for the sake of accuracy"
-- as opposed to what: "Omitted in order to conceal" ?
always wondered about that one.

[Archive]

Posted By: David

I was surprised not to see mentioned one that I often use: "crease in corner, paper loss on back-- otherwise Near Mint"

And, as I finally got my new camera working (in other words, finally figured how it works), I no longer use the suspicous, "Item is nicer than appears in scan"

[Archive]

Posted By: jeff

if you have a scanner that puts yellow dots all over the card sometimes, you gotta say that.

but it's still suspicious.

[Archive]

Posted By: runscott

So PLEASE do not bid extra, thinking this is a rare ERROR card!

[Archive]

Posted By: Brian Hodes

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1829790181

[Archive]

Posted By: jeff

that card is:

"ex-mt with major center crease, stamp on back, minor corner wear and light staining. at least a 5, maybe a 6! these baseball legends are not easy to come by!"

regards,
jeff